↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Understanding the impact of interprofessional collaboration on the quality of care: a case report from a small-scale resource limited health care environment

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
416 Mendeley
Title
Understanding the impact of interprofessional collaboration on the quality of care: a case report from a small-scale resource limited health care environment
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, June 2017
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s140042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jamiu O Busari, Franka M Moll, Ashley J Duits

Abstract

A critical assessment of current health care practices, as well as the training needs of various health care providers, is crucial for improving patient care. Several approaches have been proposed for defining these needs with attention on communication as a key competency for effective collaboration. Taking our cultural context, resource limitations, and small-scale setting into account, we researched the applicability of a mixed focus group approach for analysis of the communication between doctors and nurses, as well as the measures for improvement. Assessment of nurse-physician communication perception in patient care in a Caribbean setting. Focus group sessions consisting of nurses, interns, and medical specialists were conducted using an ethnographic approach, paying attention to existing communication, risk evaluation, and recommendations for improvement. Data derived from the focus group sessions were analyzed by thematic synthesis method with descriptive themes and development of analytic themes. The initial focus group sessions produced an extensive list of key recommendations which could be clustered into three domains (standardization, sustainment, and collaboration). Further discussion of these domains in focus groups showed nurses' and physicians' domain perspectives and effects on patient care to be broadly similar. Risks related to lack of information, knowledge sharing, and professional respect were clearly described by the participants. The described mixed focus group session approach for effectively determining current interprofessional communication and key improvement areas seems suitable for our small-scale, limited resource setting. The impact of the cultural context should be further evaluated by a similar study in a different cultural context.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 416 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 416 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 76 18%
Student > Master 48 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 5%
Student > Postgraduate 18 4%
Researcher 16 4%
Other 48 12%
Unknown 190 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 108 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 50 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 14 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 2%
Social Sciences 8 2%
Other 37 9%
Unknown 189 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,465,171
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#508
of 829 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,878
of 316,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 829 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.